lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 1328
Report #1328 Skillset: Loralaria Skill: FleckedFortissimo Org: Symphonium Status: Completed Mar 2015 Furies' Decision: Sol. 3 - 25% chance to block lucidity slush, max of one successful cure block per song tick. Problem: With the removal of focus balances incoming in the Overhaul, I wanted to get some solutions out there for FleckedFortissimo. Right now, if you fuse a charged bloodstone into your instrument, each tick of FleckedFortissimo (which is normally a simple prone) also knocks you off focus balance for 1 second. If you were already off-balance, it stacks, adding another second to recovery time. I think this is a fairly strong gemmed effect and would like to make sure its replacement does it justice. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Change the gemmed effect of FleckedFortissimo to disrupt the target's equilibrium if ticked on, requiring the victim to CONCENTRATE to regain equilibrium. Ideally this CONCENTRATE will be much faster than normal, since this is a passive, no power cost and recurring effect. The danger should be in aeon or with command denial affs, not spending time recovering equilibrium. 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Change the gemmed effect of FleckedFortissimo to do a small mana drain each tick, because of the disruptively loud notes. 0 R: 0 Solution #3: Change the gemmed effect of FleckedFortissimo such that the music is so egregiously loud that it'll have a chance to distract you from sipping from your lucidity slush vial, causing you to lose the sip and take normal lucidity balance while bloodstone-FF is playing. 25% is par for gemmed effects, though the focus disrupt is 50% chance now. Chance won't stack with other Symphonists with charged bloodstone. Player Comments: ---on 2/25 @ 04:20 writes: Sol 1 is too strong, Active disrupt skills cost power, and a passive disrupt every 10 seconds? No thank you. Sol 3 sounds the best to me, as long as it's a herbbane/recessional type skill that doesn't actually take balance, only fails the action. I think the chance of occurence should be between 25-33%. It's going to be strong in aeon, and not so strong outside of it, so I'm leaning towards 33%. ---on 2/25 @ 06:09 writes: I do not think asking for a dirupt -- even a minor form of it -- is too much to ask for, as per sol. 1. Remember that you're not always going to be hearing, and that Loralaria has lacked stopping power that I think this solution will provide. Sol. 2 is the simplest, and will synergise well with vitals pressure and manabarbs, etc etc. Solution 3 is my favourite. I would like it to consume sip and salve balance if it procs, since we're trading a 50% chance of disrupting focus balance for a suggested 33% chance. ---on 2/25 @ 06:12 writes: No thanks to solution 1, passive prone + disrupt is crazy hindering. Still thinking on 2 and 3 ---on 2/25 @ 19:10 writes: 2 or 3 is fine. 3 is fine ONLY if there is a cooldown on the proc, else RNG can really hate you and you never sip to cure out of X. If this doesn't happen, I'd go with Synkarin and have it be herbbane/recessional type of sip failure ---on 2/28 @ 03:27 writes: I think solution 3 has the best merit, but I have one concern - it shouldn't affect health/mana/bromides balance, but only lucidity balance for the sipping part, just to keep it localised on affecting affliction curing which was the same effect as disrupting focus. Whether or not it should be a herbbane/recessional or if it should take the balance upon failure... I dunno. Personally, I would rather have a higher proc chance on the effect and have it not take balance (more reliability) than a lower chance and for it to take balance. But that's just me. ---on 3/1 @ 21:17 writes: The intent was indeed to include h/m/e balances, but I think your point is also valid, Lerad. I'll edit it to only be lucidity sips and salve balances. I am really wary of making it a Recessional-type effect -- Loralaria is far too similar to Starhymn already. I'd personally rather have a low (25% is par for gemmed effects, but I'd hope for 33%) chance to take balance and NOT have a cooldown. ---on 3/3 @ 16:38 writes: Wait, why salve balance too? ---on 3/3 @ 18:11 writes: 'cause it cracks the vials that hold both salves and drinks. ---on 3/3 @ 18:47 writes: Yeah that has nothing to do with your offense. No thanks to that. Lucidity only please since the previous effect dealt with mental affs and as Lerad said, the effect should be similar to the old one. ---on 3/4 @ 04:36 writes: I'm in favour of moving a gemmed FleckedFortissimo to knock a target off lucidity balance or delay lucidity balance regain much as it currently does for focus balance. Knocking off salve balance isn't an apparent need to Symphonist offense (unless I missed something), and I'm not seeing the reasoning for it. ---on 3/5 @ 01:12 writes: Yeah, no thanks to knocking off salve balance too ---on 3/12 @ 11:15 writes: Why not move its effect on focus balance over to lucidityslush, but at a somewhat reduced amount (to account for the smaller curing pool we have post- overhaul)? Ie. Add some time to lucidityslush balance regain +/- knock it off balance for a fraction of a second. I don't think anyone particularly cares for a semi-recessional/jitterbug clone again as in solution 3, and solution 1 is far too strong. Solution 2 is okay, but I don't see its value. ---on 3/13 @ 21:44 writes: I've edited solution 1 and 3 to try and balance them out. Let me know what you think. @Rivius, mana drain is always useful for manakills/manabarbs. ---on 3/14 @ 02:25 writes: What would a mana drain contribute to your kill method, considering Hallifax guilds have no mana condition kill method, out of curiosity. ---on 3/14 @ 02:29 writes: I can support solution 2, at a similar rate to other equivalent drain effects. I do not support solutions 1 and 3 in their current forms. ---on 3/14 @ 02:48 writes: Solution 1 is too strong a suggestion as discussed over Envoys. Loralaria already has access to passive off balance, and adding passive concentrate-level off EQ is too much. No support for this proposal. ---on 3/14 @ 03:01 writes: @Jaamil it may be a nod to manabarbs in Octave, which I can see(-ish), but I'm thinking it more plays into the new Aeromancy proposal worked into 1313 to supplement a manakill. Not a fan of the idea because the suggestion's premise doesn't center around bolstering a Symphonist offense, but moreso supporting a group kill instead. ---on 3/15 @ 23:48 writes: @Maligorn solutions 1 and 3 are still staggering upgrades to a skill that has a chance to slightly hinder a secondary curing method. Please explain the reasoning behind these solutions and why they are needed to balance Loralaria - keeping in mind that some would argue that the elimination of focus is sufficiently beneficial to your spec that this skill's replacement should actually represent a considerable nerf. Thanks! ---on 3/16 @ 01:15 writes: Hahaha, a nerf. No. Solution 1 is my way of attempting to introduce something new into the bard spec -- helping hinder escape attempts. It's hilariously easy to get away from pfifth, so don't come running in here with that. Like I said in the solution, the danger should be in aeon and command denial (in line with Symphonist combat). Solution 3 is my concept of the Overhaul version of what it currently is -- a 50% chance to disrupt focus balance. I'm asking for a 25% chance to disrupt lucidity (could make it only when it ticks on the victim). Remember that there is a serious opportunity cost when you fuse one gem over another. Gemmed effects, in my opinion, should be rather potent. ---on 3/16 @ 23:39 writes: It's hilariously easy to get away from anyone if you want to, bards are actually more capable of keeping people still than most classes. That doesn't justify a passive ability usually reserved for active power-costing abilities. Sol 3 seems reasonable enough, and that's the only one I'd support. ---on 3/17 @ 02:29 writes: New solution 3 only, the one that has a 25% chance to block lucidity curing. Solution 1 is still too much ---on 3/25 @ 19:26 writes: Agreed that #1 is too strong. Sol #3 supported. ---on 3/29 @ 00:40 writes: Solution 3 only. ---on 3/30 @ 02:41 writes: Solution 1 is way too powerful. I like solution 3 if it is like recessional, low % chance to block the curing, but I don't think it should actually take the balance (making it most useful when combined with aeon). ---on 3/31 @ 03:57 writes: Sol 3 is okay